Seòmar agus comataidhean

It is good to have that clarified. I would also highlight the sensible suggestion that the industry made last week about promoting the use of gloves by young children when fireworks are used at organised events and suchlike.

I will now move on to the questions that the convener thought that I was going to ask, which are about the restrictions on the use and supply of fireworks. This is a line of questioning that I have pursued with various panels. The bill seeks to introduce certain days and times for the sale and use of fireworks, but are you able to say a little bit about the rationale behind that measure? It has received quite widespread support from the majority of stakeholders, which is really reassuring, but we have also heard concerns that, if you pick one date, that means that you cannot pick another—if that makes sense. Have you given any consideration to that?

Again, I will join my questions together. Do you think that it would be worth giving local authorities some flexibility to take into account other occasions—sporting or other cultural events, for example—that people could perhaps apply to use fireworks at?

I understand that caveat, and on balance I am probably convinced by the approach of having set days for the sale and use of fireworks. It still seems a wee bit unfair for people with autism, pet owners and whoever to have to put in place mitigation measures, including leaving their own homes, come new year. Of course, that option would not have been open to them the past two new years, when fireworks were used.

I have a final question. Has the Government carried out any assessment of the impact of picking the specific dates that are included in the bill on event organisers and retailers such as the independent retailer from Aberdeen who gave evidence last week?

Good morning. Unfortunately, I do not have a dog to represent at the committee.

I have some questions about the restrictions, but I also want to pick up on some details from last week’s evidence. As Jamie Greene and Pauline McNeill indicated, industry representatives gave powerful evidence, which the minister will have read. What was most striking was that that was the only evidence that we have heard that has been counter to the bill. All the other evidence that we have heard from stakeholders has been very supportive. I know that you are pleased about that.

The Republic of Ireland and other countries were mentioned last week. What evidence was taken from those countries as the bill was developed? I know that there is more or less a full ban on fireworks in the Republic of Ireland. The evidence that we heard last week challenged the committee in our scrutiny of the legislation. A black market has formed in Ireland, which you have talked about a little.

The clerks asked for and got information from Ireland, which I have scanned through. There seems to be a mixed picture regarding firework incidents, seizures and the value of items seized. There is a general downward trend, although the figures go up and down from year to year. There has certainly been an overall decline in prosecutions, from 11 in 2015 to two in 2020, which is good. That seems to be the general trend.

Most importantly, the Government inspector of explosives at the Irish Department of Justice told us:

“While instances of illegal firework use do still occur in Ireland, in particular in the run up to Halloween, the Department believes the restrictions in place considerably mitigate against their widespread misuse, and the associated distress and risk they can cause to public safety and property.”

That seems positive, given the evidence that we heard last week.

What evidence or information do you have from other countries? That came from the Republic of Ireland; I think that Hawaii was mentioned last week.

It was about the evidence that we received last week on sparkler use.

I join my colleagues in welcoming you back to the committee today, minister. It is great to see you looking happy and healthy and very enthusiastic about this area of work, which we all know you have been a lifelong champion of.

As the convener said, your portfolio is incredibly big. I want to ask about the racial equality framework, which had a high priority in the previous parliamentary session. You appeared before our predecessor committee and came several times to the cross-party group, which I then chaired, to discuss the framework. You will be aware that at the end of the parliamentary session there was some criticism of the framework, with stakeholders saying that it was making slow progress. I was pleased to hear about the new immediate priorities plan that you outlined. Could you talk a wee bit about how that is progressing and what we hope to get from it? It would be helpful if you could focus on the employment gap for ethnic minorities and occupational segregation.

Thank you for that very comprehensive answer. You have anticipated many of my supplementary questions. The convener will be glad to know that I do not have many more questions.

I will focus on employment, as that is where we have ended up. As you mentioned, that extends across other portfolios, such as Richard Lochhead’s. However, taking a general overview, do you think that if the plan is successful and does what we hope it will do, it will have a big impact on employment? You know how much of a concern that was to the committee in the previous session—I know that that committee did not have exactly the same remit as this committee. There was a review of that area and, as you know, it is an issue that comes up often.

Are they low noise for humans and animals?

That is helpful; thank you.

In relation to the point about the differing views of local authorities, they have been democratically elected and I do not have a lot of difficulty with different local authorities making different decisions, because they make decisions based on the manifestos that they stood on and what the public in their areas want.

That brings me on to my final question, convener, if that is all right. It is more of a general question. You have put forward a good case and have articulated it really well, but it will not be any surprise to you to hear that it is the opposite from what we have heard up to now. Fraser Stevenson acknowledged that. You have made some good points, certainly, but then I think back to 6, 7 and 8 November and to other dates since I became an MSP, when my inbox has been flooded with messages from people—including pet owners and people with autistic children—wondering what the Scottish Parliament and Scottish Government are going to do about fireworks.

As we have discussed, the world has moved on since we were young. I grew up in the 1980s and we loved fireworks, but the world has moved on. We understand people’s needs better now, and we have more of a community spirit in relation to people who do not like fireworks. In the past, if you had an autistic child, that was just tough, but that is not the case any more—quite rightly so. That is where the Government and Parliament are coming from.

I am rambling on a bit, so I will ask my question. Do you have any sympathy with any part of the legislation? It might not solve the fireworks issue overnight and it might create some of the issues that you have mentioned, but this is partly about changing our relationship with fireworks—changing the culture of fireworks in Scotland—and making that slow progress. I put it to you that it is also about the powerful message that can be given by a Government and Parliament passing legislation so that we can say to the people who contact us, “This may not be perfect legislation, but we hear what you say and we will try to do something about it.”

You made your view of the overall bill pretty clear in your opening remarks, but on the assumption that the Parliament is going to pass legislation on the matter, you will want to be involved in certain aspects of it. Given that, what do you think about the date proposals? Should no dates be specified at all? Of course, that would bring its own complications, given that there would be days—new year, for example—when what you have suggested could happen. Should local authorities have the flexibility to meet individual needs and requirements, which is something else that we have heard about?

I see Andy Hubble nodding. Do you want to respond to that question?